« Go Back   « Go Back
Summary of Question 1

This proposed law would prohibit the use of certain traps for fur-bearing mammals, prohibit certain methods of hunting bear or bobcat, and eliminates some restrictions on who may serve on the state Fisheries and Wildlife Board.

The proposed law would prohibit the use, setting, manufacture, or possession of any trap to capture fur-bearing mammals, except common mouse and rat traps, nets, and box or cage traps that confine a whole animal without grasping any part of it. Traps designed to grip an animal's body or body part, crush as steel jaw leghold traps, padded leghold traps, and snares, would be prohibited. Federal and state health officials could use such traps in case of a threat to human health or safety. Where a property owner had reasonably tried but failed to correct an animal problem on the property using a legal trap, the owner could apply for and the state Director of Fisheries and Wildlife could issue a permit to use a prohibited type of trap, except a leghold trap, for up to 30 days to correct the problem.

A person violating any of these requirements could be punished by a fine of between $300 and $1000, or imprisonment for up to 6 months, or both, for each prohibited trap and each day of violation. A person convicted for a second violation would be required to surrender, and could never again obtain, any trapping license or problem animal control permit.

The proposed law would also prohibit the pursuit or hunting of bear or bobcat with the aid of a dog or dogs. Hunting bear using any type of bait, lure, or attraction, or knowingly hunting bear in a baited area, would also be prohibited. The Director could allow the use of dogs or bait in legitimate scientific research projects and in order to control particular animals that posed a threat to human safety or that destroyed livestock, property, or crops.

Violators could be punished by a fine of between $300 and $1000, or imprisonment for up to 6 months, or both, for each violation. A person convicted for a second violation would be required to surrender, and could never again obtain, any hunting and dog training licenses and permits.

The proposed law would eliminate the requirement that five members of the state Fisheries and Wildlife Board have held sporting licenses in the state for five consecutive years and that four members represent fishing, hunting, and trapping interests.

The proposed law states that if any of its provisions were declared invalid, the other provisions would remain in effect.

1996 - Essex County - Question 1Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of Representatives before May 1, 1996?

View as: # | %

Essex County Results
« Return to Aggregate Results

 
City/Town Ward Pct Blanks Total Votes Cast
Totals
175,145
81,188
40,112 296,445
Amesbury
 
3,913
1,743
841
6,497
Andover
 
10,005
5,001
932
15,938
Beverly
 
11,321
4,768
1,837
17,926
Boxford
 
2,396
1,201
520
4,117
Danvers
 
7,632
3,537
959
12,128
Essex
 
1,088
666
60
1,814
Georgetown
 
1,900
1,061
695
3,656
Gloucester
 
7,067
3,481
2,310
12,858
Groveland
 
1,838
866
102
2,806
Hamilton
 
2,498
1,266
333
4,097
Haverhill
 
12,491
5,659
2,523
20,673
Ipswich
 
3,855
2,215
869
6,939
Lawrence
 
6,080
2,985
3,921
12,986
Lynn
 
16,409
7,349
3,938
27,696
Lynnfield
 
3,923
1,846
701
6,470
Manchester-by-the-Sea
 
1,964
898
221
3,083
Marblehead
 
7,081
2,715
1,993
11,789
Merrimac
 
1,657
855
140
2,652
Methuen
 
9,471
5,282
2,444
17,197
Middleton
 
1,588
927
447
2,962
Nahant
 
1,425
553
220
2,198
Newbury
 
2,060
1,362
123
3,545
Newburyport
 
5,274
2,254
1,615
9,143
N. Andover
 
6,887
3,101
1,948
11,936
Peabody
 
12,960
5,657
3,612
22,229
Rockport
 
2,843
1,058
253
4,154
Rowley
 
1,362
903
260
2,525
Salem
 
10,347
3,741
1,870
15,958
Salisbury
 
1,575
757
737
3,069
Saugus
 
7,206
3,177
2,188
12,571
Swampscott
 
4,628
1,701
1,040
7,369
Topsfield
 
1,809
1,194
284
3,287
Wenham
 
1,280
645
83
2,008
W. Newbury
 
1,312
764
93
2,169
County Totals
175,145
81,188
40,112 296,445